Preface-
Environmental framework is a key aspect in creating effective environmental policies. A more in depth understanding of environmental policy framework can be found on my last blog post, which can be accessed through the link provided below:
https://environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/12/activity-42-environmental-policy.html
On that post is a table composed of my own environmental policy framework that I created, which is also provided below. This framework is what I will apply to assess the problem being focused on here; the controversial debate of hydrofracking.
My Environmental Policy Framework | |
Frames | Frame description |
Identity | -Considers “who am I?” and “who are they?”, or the identities, of all those involved. -Probes values, beliefs, morals, motives, and ethics of myself, and other individuals or businesses involved, whether directly or indirectly. -Includes gathering and utilizing demographic information, or “identities” of involved entities to provide context for every frame of reference included in conflict |
Conflict management | Seeks to minimize/mitigate conflict by: -Utilizing scientific facts/data for evidence to arguments - Seeks to make compromises between parties involved, if possible -Attempts to minimize any negative impacts to all involved, whether directly or indirectly -Outlines compensation fees in the event of damage, destruction, direct detrimental impacts made to human and environmental health, and death |
Risk assessment | Assesses risks to analyze the: -benefits -cost projections -potential gains and loses -potential to discover any advantages or disadvantages that exist for all parties involved in the conflict. -Ecological, Environmental, Biological, Cultural, Historical and Mathematical probabilities of safety outcomes spurred by development projects. -Hidden agendas of any party involved |
Sustainability | -Analyzes the environmental issues that exist in a space, as well as the sustainability needs or goals that align with where that space of land is geographically. -Highlights need for global authority and judicial institution that handles offenses made against environmental sustainability, especially at mass levels -Addresses the need for mandates that aim to phase out the reliance of fossil fuels as a major energy source and usage of plastics/ microplastics |
Policy implementation and enforcement | -Outlines consequences for not following policy -Addresses need enforcement at all levels of government -Highlights growing need for global level institutions that carry out inspections and uphold the standards outlined in the policy. -Aim to get everyone, government official or not, active in adopting policies -Can provide the incentives needed to motivate governments and enforcers to be more involved
|
Summary of problem-
The world has energy needs, like the need for electricity to be warm or fuel to run your car, and these needs are met through the consumption of resources (Jerome, 2017). Many of the resources or processes used to obtain resources rely on the use of water, which is an increasing threat as fresh, accessible water that is healthy enough for human bathing and consumption is finite, making up less than 1% of the worlds total water supply (Mutiti, et al., n.d.3). As global populations grow and societies continue to advance, our energy needs as a species multiply (Mutiti, et al., n.d.1). Resources we utilize to meet our energy needs are classified as either renewable or non-renewable resources (Jerome, 2017). Renewable resources can, in theory, be renewed "at least as quickly as they're consumed", and includes the energy from sources like the sun (solar) or moving water (hydroelectric) among others (Mutiti, et al., n.d.2). On the other hand, Non-renewable resources are limited, can not be renewed, and are sourced from fossil fuels or nuclear material (Jerome, 2017). Besides biofuel, renewable resources cause little to no pollution whereas nonrenewable resources pollute the air, water and life of an environment continuously, will eventually run out, and overall exacerbate the effects of climate change. That pollution degrading the environment will go on to directly effect human life and existing health status (Jerome, 2017)(Mutiti, et al., n.d.1). In order to find solutions for these energy problems individuals, or companies, must locate the energy source and find a way to harness or extract it. Global energy needs, as well as business' interests in financial gain, encouraged people to identify these natural energy reserves and develop technologies that can be used to harness or extract them.
One of these methods of extraction is called Hydraulic Fracturing, or "fracking", and has become a subject of public debate (Cohen, 2014). It essentially works like this:
1) Drill a vertical well thousands of feet down, and being drilled horizontally for up to several thousand feet for optimum resource extraction (Cohen, 2014).
2) Mix an insane amount of water with toxic chemicals and sand to make frack fluid, then inject it into wells at super high pressures to creature new fractures for access to the resources; I'm talking over 306 million gallons of water PER fracture, and multiple fractures can be made in just one well (Fracking's environmental impact).
3) Extract the water with the oil and natural gas (Mutiti, et al., n.d.1). However, not all of the water is collected, it can end up being washed into water ways, and it is further contaminated with heavy metals and toxins after going through layers of the earth (Fracking's environmental impact).
The contentious nature of this extraction procedure requires the subject to be looked at through a detailed and meticulous scope, or in this case, environmental policy framework, to try to understand the depth of how and why this conflict exists, and to also make the most effective judgements when crafting a solution.
Conflict analysis through environmental frames:
Identity-
As an environmentalist myself, I would approach the use of any potentially damaging technology with a mindful, and caring attitude. I am not driven by money, but rather simply the appeal of trying to minimize any damage I cause, while also leaving the world a better place than I found it. I recognize that my mindset is not a common one, and that a majority of humans operate in accordance to observances made in psychology, which essentially state that money is one of, if not the biggest motivator for taking action, and that money causes affluent feelings to build within individuals. Socio-economic status is an important aspect of consideration, because this can provide hints to the attitudes, ethics, and morals that are held by the fracking companies involved. Having this helps us to develop a more in-depth understanding of the real identity and agendas laying behind someone's professional mask. For example, if the CEO of the fracking company is discovered to be breaking these environmental policies after promising to adhere, most of the time they wont care, because they're wealthy and can pay their way out. This line of thinking addresses the potential need for different, and more intense consequences for breaking laws which will actually effect all offenders, not just the poor who can't afford to pay their way into or out of situations.
Conflict management-
When it comes to contentious topics, conflict management is vital in settling problems. With fracking there are likely to be high levels of anger and tension caused in those effected by fracking, while on the other hand there will be high levels of defensiveness that spurs pride and anger in individuals from the company. If my well water on my farm were toxified beyond drinking levels I would be livid, especially if it was caused by a process that wasn't even necessary to preform in the beginning. On the other hand, if I were the one from the company handling the issue I would likely get upset by someone who is accusing me of doing wrong, and also saying that my job wasn't even necessary in the first place. Of course considering the feelings of both of these individuals is important, and so too is the fairness of the outcome. So though each party's feelings are considered important, things still may not swing their way, especially here in the case of the fracking company, because fracking is proving, through scientific evidence, to be a detrimental procedure.
Risk assessment-
When it comes to risks with fracking there is so much that should be considered, but some of the main concerns involve how the process will impact human health and safety, ecosystem health and safety, and possible hidden agendas that could be used against someone. When it comes to fracking, the risks of encountering new viruses and bacteria HAVE to be considered not only because others could be exposed to said bacteria or virus, but also because its impossible to get 100% of the water back from fracking, and that water (which is now contaminated with diseases) is going to either end back up in our local water sources, or will be sent through municipal wastewater treatment facilities, most of whom do not have the technology needed to be able to properly and fully clean that water (Fracking's environmental impacts: water).
Sustainability-
As mentioned above, the energy sources we rely on to propel our society are finite, meaning we will run out. Not only this, but the use of energy sources like fossil fuels causes detrimental impacts to human and environmental health, which sets us back in trying to be globally sustainable. Using up limited resources and causing pollution to the atmosphere and water will leave us with a desolate wasteland of an earth in at least 10 years, and leave us with no resources to keep us going. On that note, after probing scientific evidence I feel it is safe to say that fracking doesn't at all fit into the category of sustainability due to its mass levels of pollution and consumption of fresh water, and therefore needs rules made which steer people away from the use of fossil fuels.
Policy implementation and enforcement-
As mentioned earlier, many people are incentivized by money. If laws were made to keep companies from fracking, they would likely pay off the authorities who are addressing them, because they don't care about anything other than being able to make more money. It is also recognized that people in general are pretty lazy, and even if environmental policies are put in place, they might not even adhere to them unless they had more of a reason to. This shows that state, federal, and international governments need to create an authority head who not only carries out inspections, but who also holds people accountable for the actions they have committed against the environment, because especially with something like fracking, large amounts of damage are being caused which contributes to being unsustainable
Works Cited
“Fracking - Greenpeace USA .” Fracking , Greenpeace USA, www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/issues/fracking/.
“Fracking's Environmental Impacts: Water.” Fracking's Environmental Impacts: Water | Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace USA, www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/issues/fracking/environmental-impacts-water/.
Gray, Barbara, and Linda L Putnam. “Means to What End? Conflict Management Frames.” Environmental Practice, vol. 5, no. 3, 2003, pp. 239–246
Kurrer, Christian. “Environment Policy: General Principles and Basic Framework.” Fact Sheets on the European Union | European Parliament, European Parliament , Nov. 2020, www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/71/environment-policy-general-principles-and-basic-framework.
Lewis, Madison. (n.d.1). Activity 2.3.2- Ranches and Grasslands Conservation, Blogger, 26 Nov. 2020, environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/11/activity-232-ranches-and-grasslands.html.
Lewis, Madison. (n.d.2). Activity 3.2.1- Natural Resources Review, Blogger, 1 Oct. 2020, environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/09/activity-321-natural-resources-review.html.
Lewis, Madison. (n.d.3). Activity 3.2.3- Alternative Energy - Geothermal Energy, Blogger, 15 Oct. 2020, environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/10/activity-323-alternative-energy.html.
Lewis, Madison. (n.d.4). Activity 3.3.1 Air Pollution Core Activity, Blogger, 22 Oct. 2020, environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/10/activity-331-air-pollution-core-activity.html.
Lewis, Madison. (n.d.5). Activity 4.2- Environmental Policy Frameworks, Blogger, 4 Dec. 2020, environmentalscience1301madisonlewis.blogspot.com/2020/12/activity-42-environmental-policy.html.
Mutiti, S., et al (n.d.1),(2018). “Chapter 3: Non-renewable Energy”. Introduction to environmental science (3rd ed.). Biological Science Open Textbooks. University System of Georgia.
Mutiti, S., et al (n.d.2),(2018). “Chapter 4: Renewable Energy”. Introduction to environmental science (3rd ed.). Biological Science Open Textbooks. University System of Georgia.
Mutiti, s, et al. (n.d.3),(2018). "Chapter 7: Water." Introduction to environmental science (3rd ed.), by Mutiti et al, Biological Science Open Textbooks. University system of Georgia, 2018, pp. 9.
Cohen, Steven. 2014. "Understanding Environmental Policy." Vol. Second edition, Columbia University Press, 2014. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=781078&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Comments
Post a Comment